OK, this is awkward and at least 40% of me is saying "leave well enough alone!" but the other 80% of me really needs to know. (The 20% of me that is over 100% in the example above is sighing and wishing I'd paid more attention to mathematics in college.)
So The Points Between finally got listed on WFG, and obviously Chris' review is not the one I would have preferred to get. But it was neither malicious nor nasty, so as far as I'm concerned, fair's fair. When you throw your work out there for all to see, you accept the risks that go with that. A lack of enthusiasm is one of those risks.
(So of course the next step was to obsessively read and re-read the review while drinking coffee and thinking black thoughts about life and the futility of putting words to page. That's what I did Sunday. Well, that and I played Skyrim. Check! Moving on.)
The step after that is to take a fresh look at it and see if I can see what the reviewer sees. Not necessarily to agree, but to at least comprehend. So that's where I am now, and I need a definition from the crowd at large.
The review describes much of what's posted so far as a "self-conscious narrative," which means something pretty specific to me -- I've always understood it to be as a kind of meta-story where the narrator is aware that he or she is telling a story and makes the reader aware that it's a story, and then spends time talking about the story *as* a story. That was a very surprising comment since it's not even close to anything I was going for (though some literary critics will claim that's pretty common for authors, as illustrated in Deconstructing Chapter Five). So I spent a few hours trying to see it, then I got tired, and then I figured I could post here in the hopes either Chris or someone else could explain.
The other alternative is that "self conscious" is used in the way that you could describe a person as feeling very self-conscious, i.e., awkward and halting and bashful, though that doesn't quite fit with some of the other comments (there's no complaint that reads "author is obviously intimidated by the act of putting words to paper.")
Anyway, was hoping for some clarification. I promise not to argue though I may ask more specific questions to try and understand.